Advance file photoA lawsuit launched by a group of GOP-connected Staten Islanders contends that campaign contribution and spending limits were skirted because DFS billed Debi Rose's campaign less than fair market value for its services. Ms. Rose is pictured above in this November 2009 photo. STATEN ISLAND, N.Y. --- The treasurer for Democratic City Councilwoman Debi Rose's North Shore primary effort said that campaign "dysfunction" led him to sign an affidavit about campaign matters even though he hadn't prepared the document himself and wasn't aware of all its contents.

The treasurer, Mariners Harbor resident David Thomas, was the first witness as the trial regarding the Rose campaign's relationship with the Working Families Party (WFP) and its Data and Field Services (DFS) consulting arm began earlier today in the home-port annex of state Supreme Court.

A lawsuit launched by attorney Randy Mastro on behalf of a group of GOP-connected Staten Islanders contends that campaign contribution and spending limits were skirted because DFS billed Ms. Rose's campaign less than fair market value for its services.

The courtroom was packed early, with Ms. Rose in attendance for a time and joined by more than 40 supporters.

On the stand, Thomas told Mastro he was unaware that Bryan Collinsworth, a WFP spokesman, was working on the campaign. Mastro then presented a copy of an affidavit signed by Thomas that mentioned Collinsworth's involvement.

The affidavit had been sent in response to a query from the city Campaign Finance Board.

Under questioning from Justice Anthony Giacobbe, Thomas said that the affidavit was e-mailed to him, and that he signed it at the request of "campaign management." He said that there was "a lot of dysfunction" in the campaign, and that paperwork often "got to me on the final day."

Ms. Rose declined to comment.

Referring to e-mails and other documents, Mastro contended that a handful of WFP operatives were working on behalf of Ms. Rose's campaign for three months before they were officially contracted to do so.

Mastro alleged that DFS paid some of the operatives more for their services than the firm billed Ms. Rose's campaign, meaning that the campaign got a discount.

Mastro also said that DFS billed the campaign $375 for access to a "sophisticated" list of likely voters when the list was actually worth "tens of thousands of dollars." The campaign, Mastro contended, never even paid the bill.

Speaking outside of court, DFS attorney Lawrence Mandelker said that his evidence will prove that Ms. Rose actually paid on the "high end" of fair market value to DFS, and that the firm did no uncompensated work for the campaign.